About your Search

20130416
20130424
Search Results 0 to 3 of about 4
his miranda rights, read miranda rights just getting that as you were wrapping up. adam housley live in boston. adam, thank you. investigators are furiously trying to track down the terrorism connection to this case. and they are focusing on a trip, the older brother made last year. chief intelligence correspondent catherine herridge is here tonight with an update on that. good evening, catherine. >> thank you, bret. some of the most compelling evidence and preliminary evidence comes from surveillance video and one eyewitness during that carjacking thursday night before a shootout with police one of the brothers said, quote: did you hear about the boston explosion? i did that. court records filed monday show the tsarnaev brothers walked into boylston street together 11 minutes before the explosions, each with a backpack. they split up. one heading for the finish line and the other toward the forum restaurant, the site of the second explosion. 30 seconds before the first blast. the started fidgeting with cell phone after the blast almost everyone turned around, quote: apparent bewil
gathering purposes since he's been president. when we read these people their miranda rights and give them a lawyer the only way you can gather intelligence is if the terror suspect and the lawyer will allow you to do so. intelligence gathering through plea bargaining is not going to make us safe. jenna: so we spoke to a former member of the fbi on our show yesterday that seems to not have a problem with miranda rights, that is their opinion. we'll see what they get as far as information from this one suspect. >> can i mention something. jenna: please. >> i don't have a problem with miranda rights. this man can only be tried in federal court. he's never eligible for military commissions. a first year law student could convict this person. what i'm worried about is what does he know about future attacks? he's telling us that his brother was the bad guy, he's sort of just along for the ride. they had no international connections. guess what, he's down-playing his involvement. what i am suggesting is that we use the national security legal system where we can interview him without a lawyer to
this suspect, they'll read the miranda rights and all of that. they're going to try to find out if this individual who has now been arrested acted alone as a so-called lone wolf or was part of some broader conspiracy, walk us through what the fbi is about to do. >> sure. well, wolf, they will -- they will take him into custody, they will give him his miranda rights because they want to be sure any statement the individual may make is admissible in court during the prosecution. if the individual agrees to talk, there will be -- they will take a statement and they will also likely confront him with forensic evidence and things that they have learned, photographs, they will ask him to identify how he constructed the bomb, how he knew to construct the bomb, who, if anyone, he worked with, who he communicated with, they'll want to -- they will want to make sure to take when he's arrested any cell phones, blackberries, pocket litter, pieces of paper, notebooks he may have on him and they'll want to have him retrace for them his steps. they will then send other investigators out to try
with american citizens. it allows the justice department to delay reading a suspect his miranda rights if doing so is in the interest of -- quote -- "public safety." the administration had rightly invoked this public safety exception in the case of the boston suspect which provided our national security professionals a discreet period of time to gather intelligence from the suspect without the presence of his lawyer. however, soon after questioning him this way, the administration recently reversed itself and read the suspect his miranda rights. in doing so, the administration, in my view, gave up a valuable opportunity to lawfully and thoroughly question the suspect for purposes of gathering intelligence about potential future terrorist plots. whether we will be able to acquire such information has now been left entirely at the discretion of the suspect and his lawyer. put simply, the suspect has been told he has the right to remain silent, and if he doesn't want to provide intelligence, he doesn't have to. is this a responsible balance between a citizen's rights and our national security? the
Search Results 0 to 3 of about 4

Terms of Use (10 Mar 2001)